Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2022 5:39:31 GMT -5
When you are getting angry, you assume something should not have happened this way, this means you are losing your ability to watch the movie as it is. As a result, you are going against the flow, you are resisting!
|
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 13, 2022 8:15:22 GMT -5
It's impossible to go against the flow of life (except in imagination) because what we are IS the flow of life. There is nothing separate from the flow. THIS unfolds however it unfolds. THIS, in the form of humans, sometimes gets sad, sometimes happy, sometimes angry, sometimes irritated, etc. The roller coaster, the SVP, flow, resistance to flow, and all other ideas are products of imagination. If imagination ceases, no words or ideas are applicable. All that one can do is point as an invitation to cease imagining and discover the "living truth."  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2022 9:39:23 GMT -5
It's impossible to go against the flow of life (except in imagination) because what we are IS the flow of life. There is nothing separate from the flow. THIS unfolds however it unfolds. THIS, in the form of humans, sometimes gets sad, sometimes happy, sometimes angry, sometimes irritated, etc. The roller coaster, the SVP, flow, resistance to flow, and all other ideas are products of imagination. If imagination ceases, no words or ideas are applicable. All that one can do is point as an invitation to cease imagining and discover the "living truth." Rollercoaster realization still missing in your case  |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 13, 2022 10:07:49 GMT -5
It's impossible to go against the flow of life (except in imagination) because what we are IS the flow of life. There is nothing separate from the flow. THIS unfolds however it unfolds. THIS, in the form of humans, sometimes gets sad, sometimes happy, sometimes angry, sometimes irritated, etc. The roller coaster, the SVP, flow, resistance to flow, and all other ideas are products of imagination. If imagination ceases, no words or ideas are applicable. All that one can do is point as an invitation to cease imagining and discover the "living truth." Rollercoaster realization still missing in your case THIS realization (TR) is fundamental because it supersedes all else and reveals how imagination obscures the Infinite. In order to understand what's going on one must escape the confines of the intellect. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Dec 13, 2022 10:57:30 GMT -5
When you are getting angry, you assume something should not have happened this way, this means you are losing your ability to watch the movie as it is. As a result, you are going against the flow, you are resisting! There are times when the most relative flow is found in acceptance of resistance. Tolle, ''Whatever the present moment contains, accept it as if you had chosen it. Always work with it, not against it.'' Sometimes the present moment includes resistance, maybe even anger. If anger arises, then that's what is, in that moment. Yes, ideally, our relative flow is aligned to absolute flow (and that's very lovely) but that's not the way life consistently happens for most of us. If someone tries to take your baby away, are you just going to let them? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Dec 13, 2022 11:06:24 GMT -5
It's impossible to go against the flow of life (except in imagination) because what we are IS the flow of life. There is nothing separate from the flow. THIS unfolds however it unfolds. THIS, in the form of humans, sometimes gets sad, sometimes happy, sometimes angry, sometimes irritated, etc. The roller coaster, the SVP, flow, resistance to flow, and all other ideas are products of imagination. If imagination ceases, no words or ideas are applicable. All that one can do is point as an invitation to cease imagining and discover the "living truth." Rollercoaster realization still missing in your case Happiness/unhappiness are both states which are a product of a mixture of our conditions, our physiology and our beliefs/understandings. One is positive leaning, the other is negative leaning, and while positive and negative define and balance each other, a balanced state is also a positive leaning state! So we naturally lean towards the positive...our natural state is positive leaning. Look at the animals and you will see this. This is also why happiness cannot cause unhappiness... unhappiness requires very specific ingredients. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 13, 2022 11:50:55 GMT -5
Rollercoaster realization still missing in your case Happiness/unhappiness are both states which are a product of a mixture of our conditions, our physiology and our beliefs/understandings. One is positive leaning, the other is negative leaning, and while positive and negative define and balance each other, a balanced state is also a positive leaning state! So we naturally lean towards the positive...our natural state is positive leaning. Look at the animals and you will see this. This is also why happiness cannot cause unhappiness... unhappiness requires very specific ingredients. Yes; the issue is self-referential reflection. If reflection is absent, there's no problem. One simply acts in whatever way is appropriate in the moment. There's no "me" involved in any of it. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Dec 13, 2022 12:23:00 GMT -5
Happiness/unhappiness are both states which are a product of a mixture of our conditions, our physiology and our beliefs/understandings. One is positive leaning, the other is negative leaning, and while positive and negative define and balance each other, a balanced state is also a positive leaning state! So we naturally lean towards the positive...our natural state is positive leaning. Look at the animals and you will see this. This is also why happiness cannot cause unhappiness... unhappiness requires very specific ingredients. Yes; the issue is self-referential reflection. If reflection is absent, there's no problem. One simply acts in whatever way is appropriate in the moment. There's no "me" involved in any of it. I gettcha.... where there's inner tussle, there's a 'me' there. I do experience this at times, but over the years, the movement to add extra layers of resistance to this has diminished. So at least it's just temporary 'inner tussle' without added resistance. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Dec 13, 2022 12:28:26 GMT -5
Nothing happens in Oneness. Nothing happens in equilibrium. Nothing would ever happen if it remained so. Nothing else would ever happen if there were not a deliberate conscious intelligent choice to do so. So Intelligent Consciousness formed an opposition. An interesting guy several hundred years ago described it this way. Ein Sof withdrew Its presence from a single point to make a space where-It-wasn't. This single point became the manifest universe. Now, this sounds very peculiarly like the Big Bang. Now, I agree that the Origin was singular with no opposite. But it seems deception, or imagination, has entered the picture, somewhere. How did the deception arise? It seems one thing is the case. Either the Originating Oneness deliberately formed the universe as it is, positive-negative, yang-yin, the rollercoaster, or we have the "Alan Watts" view, "God" formed the universe as a game of hide and seek, there is still only-One-no-thing, but God has forgotten who-He/She/It-is, God has gone to sleep, two-ness is imaginary. So how did it happened, or maybe why did it happen is a better question? So I guess we are faced with dilemma. Did Oneness accidentally (or purposely) go to sleep, forget who He/She/It is, still as the Whole? Or was the rollercoaster universe formed for a reason, and it's imagination that believes there is no rollercoaster. It seems one or the other has to be delusion. We can agree that the Origin was Oneness. I have no problem with anyone coming to this realization. But why does this realization negate the dual universe? In what does imagination consist? The nondual view is pantheism, "God" is everything. My view is pan entheism. Isaac Luria Ashkenazi (ARI = Ashkenazi Rabbi Isaac): 1534-72. Major Doctrines: Tzimtzum: Contraction: God must withdraw from a portion of the universe in order to create something other than himself. Leaves "point" of emptiness, primordial space, substratum for creation: Tehiru. Leaves residue of divine light: Reshimu (mercy + traces of Din): Vessels to receive emanated light. Requires separation of forces of Din-Justice from undistinguished totality, principle of (Self-) limitation. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Dec 13, 2022 12:43:35 GMT -5
Nothing happens in Oneness. Nothing happens in equilibrium. Nothing would ever happen if it remained so. Nothing else would ever happen if there were not a deliberate conscious intelligent choice to do so. So Intelligent Consciousness formed an opposition. An interesting guy several hundred years ago described it this way. Ein Sof withdrew Its presence from a single point to make a space where-It-wasn't. This single point became the manifest universe. Now, this sounds very peculiarly like the Big Bang. Now, I agree that the Origin was singular with no opposite. But it seems deception, or imagination, has entered the picture, somewhere. How did the deception arise? It seems one thing is the case. Either the Originating Oneness deliberately formed the universe as it is, positive-negative, yang-yin, the rollercoaster, or we have the "Alan Watts" view, "God" formed the universe as a game of hide and seek, there is still only-One-no-thing, but God has forgotten who-He/She/It-is, God has gone to sleep, two-ness is imaginary. So how did it happened, or maybe why did it happen is a better question? So I guess we are faced with dilemma. Did Oneness accidentally (or purposely) go to sleep, forget who He/She/It is? Or was the rollercoaster universe formed for a reason, and it's imagination that believes there is no rollercoaster. It seems one or the other has to be delusion. We can agree that the Origin was Oneness. I have no problem with anyone coming to this realization. But why does this realization negate the dual universe? In what does imagination consist? Isaac Luria Ashkenazi (ARI = Ashkenazi Rabbi Isaac): 1534-72. Major Doctrines: Tzimtzum: Contraction: God must withdraw from a portion of the universe in order to create something other than himself. Leaves "point" of emptiness, primordial space, substratum for creation: Tehiru. Leaves residue of divine light: Reshimu (mercy + traces of Din): Vessels to receive emanated light. Requires separation of forces of Din-Justice from undistinguished totality, principle of (Self-) limitation. You may quite like this clip, or at least find it interesting. Bashar is all about 'choice'. As said a couple of weeks ago, I find the issue of 'choice' to be a complex one, but I still like to hear a 'pro-choice' perspective sometimes |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 13, 2022 12:49:58 GMT -5
It's impossible to go against the flow of life (except in imagination) because what we are IS the flow of life. There is nothing separate from the flow. THIS unfolds however it unfolds. THIS, in the form of humans, sometimes gets sad, sometimes happy, sometimes angry, sometimes irritated, etc. The roller coaster, the SVP, flow, resistance to flow, and all other ideas are products of imagination. If imagination ceases, no words or ideas are applicable. All that one can do is point as an invitation to cease imagining and discover the "living truth." I don't usually write off topic posts in threads like these. But when I do, it's because the subject is of rather momentous historical import. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 13, 2022 13:49:27 GMT -5
Nothing happens in Oneness. Nothing happens in equilibrium. Nothing would ever happen if it remained so. Nothing else would ever happen if there were not a deliberate conscious intelligent choice to do so. So Intelligent Consciousness formed an opposition. An interesting guy several hundred years ago described it this way. Ein Sof withdrew Its presence from a single point to make a space where-It-wasn't. This single point became the manifest universe. Now, this sounds very peculiarly like the Big Bang. Now, I agree that the Origin was singular with no opposite. But it seems deception, or imagination, has entered the picture, somewhere. How did the deception arise? It seems one thing is the case. Either the Originating Oneness deliberately formed the universe as it is, positive-negative, yang-yin, the rollercoaster, or we have the "Alan Watts" view, "God" formed the universe as a game of hide and seek, there is still only-One-no-thing, but God has forgotten who-He/She/It-is, God has gone to sleep, two-ness is imaginary. So how did it happened, or maybe why did it happen is a better question? So I guess we are faced with dilemma. Did Oneness accidentally (or purposely) go to sleep, forget who He/She/It is, still as the Whole? Or was the rollercoaster universe formed for a reason, and it's imagination that believes there is no rollercoaster. It seems one or the other has to be delusion. We can agree that the Origin was Oneness. I have no problem with anyone coming to this realization. But why does this realization negate the dual universe? In what does imagination consist? The nondual view is pantheism, "God" is everything. My view is pan entheism. Isaac Luria Ashkenazi (ARI = Ashkenazi Rabbi Isaac): 1534-72. Major Doctrines: Tzimtzum: Contraction: God must withdraw from a portion of the universe in order to create something other than himself. Leaves "point" of emptiness, primordial space, substratum for creation: Tehiru. Leaves residue of divine light: Reshimu (mercy + traces of Din): Vessels to receive emanated light. Requires separation of forces of Din-Justice from undistinguished totality, principle of (Self-) limitation. The issue is rather simple; can one find an actual boundary of any kind? The monk told the ZM that the birds had already flown away. Upon hearing this response to his question about where the birds had gone, the ZM grabbed the monk's nose, twisted it, and shouted, "How could they have possibly flown away?" The ZM was trying to wake the monk up to the unified field of being in front of his eyes. As it turned out, the monk was sufficiently ripe and the ZM was successful. A follower of Ramana supposedly asked him on his deathbed, "Master, are you leaving us?" Ramana replied, "Where could I possibly go?" Same question; same answer. Perhaps the most amazing thing about humans is how they overlook the strangeness of their own bodies and the functionality of every cell composing the body. They imagine that they are separate entities controlling what happens, but they ignore the mind-boggling intelligence animating their own bodies. How does one digest food? Clot blood? Grow skin, hair, or bones? Fight off an infection? Think? See? Feel? The living truth cannot be imagined; it can only be realized. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Dec 13, 2022 14:06:16 GMT -5
Nothing happens in Oneness. Nothing happens in equilibrium. Nothing would ever happen if it remained so. Nothing else would ever happen if there were not a deliberate conscious intelligent choice to do so. So Intelligent Consciousness formed an opposition. An interesting guy several hundred years ago described it this way. Ein Sof withdrew Its presence from a single point to make a space where-It-wasn't. This single point became the manifest universe. Now, this sounds very peculiarly like the Big Bang. Now, I agree that the Origin was singular with no opposite. But it seems deception, or imagination, has entered the picture, somewhere. How did the deception arise? It seems one thing is the case. Either the Originating Oneness deliberately formed the universe as it is, positive-negative, yang-yin, the rollercoaster, or we have the "Alan Watts" view, "God" formed the universe as a game of hide and seek, there is still only-One-no-thing, but God has forgotten who-He/She/It-is, God has gone to sleep, two-ness is imaginary. So how did it happened, or maybe why did it happen is a better question? So I guess we are faced with dilemma. Did Oneness accidentally (or purposely) go to sleep, forget who He/She/It is, still as the Whole? Or was the rollercoaster universe formed for a reason, and it's imagination that believes there is no rollercoaster. It seems one or the other has to be delusion. We can agree that the Origin was Oneness. I have no problem with anyone coming to this realization. But why does this realization negate the dual universe? In what does imagination consist? The nondual view is pantheism, "God" is everything. My view is pan entheism. Isaac Luria Ashkenazi (ARI = Ashkenazi Rabbi Isaac): 1534-72. Major Doctrines: Tzimtzum: Contraction: God must withdraw from a portion of the universe in order to create something other than himself. Leaves "point" of emptiness, primordial space, substratum for creation: Tehiru. Leaves residue of divine light: Reshimu (mercy + traces of Din): Vessels to receive emanated light. Requires separation of forces of Din-Justice from undistinguished totality, principle of (Self-) limitation. The issue is rather simple; can one find an actual boundary of any kind? The monk told the ZM that the birds had already flown away. Upon hearing this response to his question about where the birds had gone, the ZM grabbed the monk's nose, twisted it, and shouted, "How could they have possibly flown away?" The ZM was trying to wake the monk up to the unified field of being in front of his eyes. As it turned out, the monk was sufficiently ripe and the ZM was successful. A follower of Ramana supposedly asked him on his deathbed, "Master, are you leaving us?" Ramana replied, "Where could I possibly go?" Same question; same answer. Perhaps the most amazing thing about humans is how they overlook the strangeness of their own bodies and the functionality of every cell composing the body. They imagine that they are separate entities controlling what happens, but they ignore the mind-boggling intelligence animating their own bodies. How does one digest food? Clot blood? Grow skin, hair, or bones? Fight off an infection? Think? See? Feel? The living truth cannot be imagined; it can only be realized. I had a tooth extracted today and noted some sadness in my gut a couple of hours later, so I went into the feeling to see what it had to say, and it was something like this...the tooth has been with me through thick and thin through my life, it has taken care of me through every meal, and in its own way, it has loved endlessly and unconditionally. There is SO much love around us all the time...we are constantly enveloped in it, it's amazing that most of us (including me) aren't aware of it all the time. I guess we wouldn't function much if we were blissed out in love all the time. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Dec 13, 2022 15:09:16 GMT -5
Nothing happens in Oneness. Nothing happens in equilibrium. Nothing would ever happen if it remained so. Nothing else would ever happen if there were not a deliberate conscious intelligent choice to do so. So Intelligent Consciousness formed an opposition. An interesting guy several hundred years ago described it this way. Ein Sof withdrew Its presence from a single point to make a space where-It-wasn't. This single point became the manifest universe. Now, this sounds very peculiarly like the Big Bang. Now, I agree that the Origin was singular with no opposite. But it seems deception, or imagination, has entered the picture, somewhere. How did the deception arise? It seems one thing is the case. Either the Originating Oneness deliberately formed the universe as it is, positive-negative, yang-yin, the rollercoaster, or we have the "Alan Watts" view, "God" formed the universe as a game of hide and seek, there is still only-One-no-thing, but God has forgotten who-He/She/It-is, God has gone to sleep, two-ness is imaginary. So how did it happened, or maybe why did it happen is a better question? So I guess we are faced with dilemma. Did Oneness accidentally (or purposely) go to sleep, forget who He/She/It is, still as the Whole? Or was the rollercoaster universe formed for a reason, and it's imagination that believes there is no rollercoaster. It seems one or the other has to be delusion. We can agree that the Origin was Oneness. I have no problem with anyone coming to this realization. But why does this realization negate the dual universe? In what does imagination consist? The nondual view is pantheism, "God" is everything. My view is pan entheism. Isaac Luria Ashkenazi (ARI = Ashkenazi Rabbi Isaac): 1534-72. Major Doctrines: Tzimtzum: Contraction: God must withdraw from a portion of the universe in order to create something other than himself. Leaves "point" of emptiness, primordial space, substratum for creation: Tehiru. Leaves residue of divine light: Reshimu (mercy + traces of Din): Vessels to receive emanated light. Requires separation of forces of Din-Justice from undistinguished totality, principle of (Self-) limitation. The monk told the ZM that the birds had already flown away. Upon hearing this response to his question about where the birds had gone, the ZM grabbed the monk's nose, twisted it, and shouted, "How could they have possibly flown away?" The ZM was trying to wake the monk up to the unified field of being in front of his eyes. As it turned out, the monk was sufficiently ripe and the ZM was successful. A follower of Ramana supposedly asked him on his deathbed, "Master, are you leaving us?" Ramana replied, "Where could I possibly go?" Same question; same answer. Perhaps the most amazing thing about humans is how they overlook the strangeness of their own bodies and the functionality of every cell composing the body. They imagine that they are separate entities controlling what happens, but they ignore the mind-boggling intelligence animating their own bodies. How does one digest food? Clot blood? Grow skin, hair, or bones? Fight off an infection? Think? See? Feel? The living truth cannot be imagined; it can only be realized. How does this negate polarity? If you step out of your door and take a walk, no matter where you walk, not matter how many valleys or how many mountains, when you get back home, all ups and downs are equal. The essence of the manifest universe is vibration. There are different rates of vibration. But if you look at a wave, the peak and trough are equal, they balance out. How does and peak and a trough balancing out negate the whole manifest universe? You are not negating Gopal's rollercoaster, it exists. Why doesn't your realization just melt ZD into nothingness, non-existence? ZD wouldn't exist without vibration (crests and troughs). I think you will do better to explain Gopal's rollercoaster, not negate it. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Dec 13, 2022 15:30:28 GMT -5
The issue is rather simple; can one find an actual boundary of any kind? The monk told the ZM that the birds had already flown away. Upon hearing this response to his question about where the birds had gone, the ZM grabbed the monk's nose, twisted it, and shouted, "How could they have possibly flown away?" The ZM was trying to wake the monk up to the unified field of being in front of his eyes. As it turned out, the monk was sufficiently ripe and the ZM was successful. A follower of Ramana supposedly asked him on his deathbed, "Master, are you leaving us?" Ramana replied, "Where could I possibly go?" Same question; same answer. Perhaps the most amazing thing about humans is how they overlook the strangeness of their own bodies and the functionality of every cell composing the body. They imagine that they are separate entities controlling what happens, but they ignore the mind-boggling intelligence animating their own bodies. How does one digest food? Clot blood? Grow skin, hair, or bones? Fight off an infection? Think? See? Feel? The living truth cannot be imagined; it can only be realized. How does this negate polarity? If you step out of your door and take a walk, no matter where you walk, not matter how many valleys or how many mountains, when you get back home, all ups and downs are equal. The essence of the manifest universe is vibration. There are different rates of vibration. But if you look at a wave, the peak and trough are equal, they balance out. How does and peak and a trough balancing out negate the whole manifest universe? You are not negating Gopal's rollercoaster, it exists. Why doesn't your realization just melt ZD into nothingness, non-existence? ZD wouldn't exist without vibration (crests and troughs). I think you will do better to explain Gopal's rollercoaster, not negate it. The rollercoaster G is talking about is specifically an emotional rollercoaster, which I would say is more a product of human dysfunction and false belief, than it is a universal polarity. We do experience what seems like polarity because there's a measuring and objectifying aspect to the mind, and this aspect can only think in terms of 'presences'. It cannot grok an absence...it objectifies it. Because of this, we experience light and dark as polarity, but in reality, there is no darkness, there is only relative absence of light, cold is a relative absence of heat, quietness is a relative absence of sound etc. So I would say the reality of existence is 'relative contrast', not 'absolute poles'. Or as you said.... vibrational. Unhappiness would be a relative absence of wellbeing. |
|
